Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
NFA & Class III Discussion
10.5” 5.56 SBR Ammo Recommendations
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TulsaMike" data-source="post: 3684566" data-attributes="member: 49625"><p>Youre only focusing on a single point. This is something the FBI learned the hard way when using a single testing method for their ammunition selection, and then realized later that the choice they made didnt work in a lot of scenarios, nor in other weapons. Since whatever ammo I purchase has to be approved by the FBI, I live with their stupid decisions daily. I dont disagree that more energy hurts more, but you are incorrect about velocity not being a variable. It is not the ONLY variable, but as I have stated, the correct solution is a proper combination of weight and velocity that matches the projectile. </p><p></p><p>If velocity didnt matter at all, then you could take a 175 gr bullet from a 300 blackout, 308, 300 win and 300 Norma mag, and they would all do the same damage. We know that isnt the case because in this example, velocity makes a significant difference in energy with the lowest being around 1/4 the energy of the highest. Much like your Taurus example, this is on the extreme end, but never the less, a perfect example of the same projectile in different scenarios. </p><p></p><p>Now lets look at WHY both velocity and weight need to be calculated properly based on projectile, instead of only considering energy as your primary factor. Both can be variables that affect penetration, energy, and the eventual jacketing/destruction of the projectile into a cavity, person, wall, or material. Having high weight low velocity isnt where you want to be, nor is having high velocity and low weight. These are simple articles I found showing the higher velocity rounds cause more damage, especially above 2700 fps. </p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.whitemountainforensic.com/wound-ballistics-motion-effects-projectiles-human-body/[/URL]</p><p>and another</p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Scientific_topics/Wound_ballistics/How_a_high-speed.html[/URL]</p><p></p><p>Both state that above critical velocities, there is significantly more damage done. By reducing the 223 to slower speeds, you are taking away one of the factors that makes the 223 deadly in such a small round. Sure it will still do damage, but the 223 is designed to be a high speed round, and most rounds are specifically designed around longer barrels. By going to a heavier bullet in a short barrel, youve hindered the output of this round from how it was originally designed. </p><p></p><p>Im sure 75 and 77 gr will still hurt plenty if you ever have to use it in self defense, but the lighter rounds perform better in shorter barrels because they maintain velocity. The 62-64 gr stuff is fantastic in a 10.5 or 11.5 inch barrel and balances a heavier weight with good velocity. If you want to keep reading other forums and base your claims off a single factory such as energy, that really has zero relevancy to how a bullet stops a flesh target, then do so. Over penetration is a significant issue when you have a round designed to fragment that impacts at below its designed velocity, which means none of that energy is delivered.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TulsaMike, post: 3684566, member: 49625"] Youre only focusing on a single point. This is something the FBI learned the hard way when using a single testing method for their ammunition selection, and then realized later that the choice they made didnt work in a lot of scenarios, nor in other weapons. Since whatever ammo I purchase has to be approved by the FBI, I live with their stupid decisions daily. I dont disagree that more energy hurts more, but you are incorrect about velocity not being a variable. It is not the ONLY variable, but as I have stated, the correct solution is a proper combination of weight and velocity that matches the projectile. If velocity didnt matter at all, then you could take a 175 gr bullet from a 300 blackout, 308, 300 win and 300 Norma mag, and they would all do the same damage. We know that isnt the case because in this example, velocity makes a significant difference in energy with the lowest being around 1/4 the energy of the highest. Much like your Taurus example, this is on the extreme end, but never the less, a perfect example of the same projectile in different scenarios. Now lets look at WHY both velocity and weight need to be calculated properly based on projectile, instead of only considering energy as your primary factor. Both can be variables that affect penetration, energy, and the eventual jacketing/destruction of the projectile into a cavity, person, wall, or material. Having high weight low velocity isnt where you want to be, nor is having high velocity and low weight. These are simple articles I found showing the higher velocity rounds cause more damage, especially above 2700 fps. [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.whitemountainforensic.com/wound-ballistics-motion-effects-projectiles-human-body/[/URL] and another [URL unfurl="true"]http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Scientific_topics/Wound_ballistics/How_a_high-speed.html[/URL] Both state that above critical velocities, there is significantly more damage done. By reducing the 223 to slower speeds, you are taking away one of the factors that makes the 223 deadly in such a small round. Sure it will still do damage, but the 223 is designed to be a high speed round, and most rounds are specifically designed around longer barrels. By going to a heavier bullet in a short barrel, youve hindered the output of this round from how it was originally designed. Im sure 75 and 77 gr will still hurt plenty if you ever have to use it in self defense, but the lighter rounds perform better in shorter barrels because they maintain velocity. The 62-64 gr stuff is fantastic in a 10.5 or 11.5 inch barrel and balances a heavier weight with good velocity. If you want to keep reading other forums and base your claims off a single factory such as energy, that really has zero relevancy to how a bullet stops a flesh target, then do so. Over penetration is a significant issue when you have a round designed to fragment that impacts at below its designed velocity, which means none of that energy is delivered. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
NFA & Class III Discussion
10.5” 5.56 SBR Ammo Recommendations
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom